Rev
13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and
bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:Rev 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.Rev
13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number
of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

Note that according to verse 17, there are three different characteristics that distinguish the beast:

his mark (of authority)

his name

the number of his name (666).

It might be argued by some that 666 must be applied to one man's name, and that this will then help identify him as the antichrist. I would offer the following verse to show that 666 need not apply solely to a man's name:

Rev 19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

The
same Greek word translated as name (onoma: G3686) that appears in
Revelation 13:17-18 is also used in chapter 19:16, so clearly the word
can also apply to a title, and not just one man's name. Now, we are told that it takes a certain understanding
and wisdom to discern just how this number is actually applied. Based
on the fact that 666 can apply to a title, below are several words and
phrases that have been put forth over the centuries as probable
solutions to the enigma of 666.

GREEK

The numeric equivalents of Greek letters can also be found in the
Encyclopedia Britannica under "Languages of the World", Table 8.

The ancient Greek word for "the Latin speaking man" is LATEINOS

L = 30

lambda

A = 1

alpha

T = 300

tau

E = 5

epsilon

I = 10

iota

N = 50

nu

O = 70

omicron

S = 200

sigma

------------

666

NOTE:
Latin is the official language of the Roman Catholic Church. Church
Documents are usually published first in Latin, and then translated from
the Latin into other languages. The association of "Lateinos" with 666
was first suggested by Irenæus (ca. 130-202 A.D.) who proposed in his Against Heresies that it might be the name of the fourth kingdom in Daniel 7:7.

Then
also Lateinos has the number six hundred and sixty-six; and it is a
very probable [solution], this being the name of the last kingdom [of
the four seen by Daniel]. For the Latins are they who at present bear
rule: I will not, however, make any boast over this [coincidence].

Dux Cleri is cited by Walter Brute (or Britte), a fourteenth century follower of Wycliff, in his Registrum, page 356.

Ludovicus
was proposed by James Bicheno (d. 1831), a British minister and author,
applying it at the time to the French King Louis XIV, as the two-horned
beast from the earth.

He Latine Basileia and Lateinos are cited by Alexander Campbell (1788-1866), founder of the Disciples of Christ, in A Debate on the Roman Catholic Religion of 1837.

See The PROPHETIC FAITH OF OUR FATHERS,
The Historical Development of Prophetic Interpretation, by Le Roy Edwin
Froom, Volumes II and IV, published by the Review and Herald Publishing
Association, Washington D.C., Copyright 1948.

This
relationship of 666 in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew is only one relatively
small, yet important indicator that the Papacy is the Antichrist and the
beast from the sea of Revelation 13. This association by itself proves
little, as 666 can fit other people using the same methods. All the
other biblical characteristics of the Antichrist must be considered and
met as well, then this association becomes significant.

An
objection has been raised that the method of gematria used above to
calculate the Roman numeral value of phrases is incorrect. The word
VICARIUS it is argued, must be calculated with letters grouped as
follows: VI=6 C=100 A=0 R=0 IU= 4 S=0, for a value of only 110, instead
of 112. This is patently incorrect. The value of each individual letter
is to be added to yield a total value. It is totally irrelevant to the
calculation if adjacent letters can be combined in groups to give a
value. This assertion that letters must be grouped is nothing but sheer
nonsense.

666 and CÆSAR NERO

Some
will suggest that the book of Revelation was written only for those
living at the time, and that 666 most probably applies to Cæsar Nero,
who ruled Rome from 54 to 68 A.D., rather than someone from latter
centuries. This point of view, which suggests Revelation had an
immediate application to the first century, rather than being prophetic,
is known as preterism, and is commonly held by the Catholic Church. So, just how is Nero linked to 666?

The
preterist takes a relatively uncommon form of Nero's name, Nero Cæsar
or Cæsar Nero, and adds an "n", resulting in Neron Cæsar. Next the Latin
is transliterated into Aramaic, resulting in nrwn qsr, which when using the numeric equivalent of the letters, then adds up to 666 as follows:

Nun

=

50

Resh

=

200

Waw

=

6

Nun

=

50

Qoph

=

100

Samech

=

60

Resh

=

200

An
example of this spelling has apparently been recently discovered in one
of the Dead Sea scrolls. If you use the same process, but without the
added "n" the result is 616. Interestingly, some early manuscripts have
616 rather than 666, but even scholars such as Irenæus [A.D. 120-202]
attribute the 616 to only a copyist error (Against Heresies: Book V Chapter XXX.), "this number [666] being found in all the most approved and ancient copies" [of the Apocalypse] and asserts that "men who saw John face to face bearing their testimony" [to it - 666].

There is a problem though with the above calculation. According to the rules of Jewish numerology, known as gematria,
when the letter Nun appears a second time in a word, it is known as a
"Final", and takes the value of 700.* So to be precise, NRWN QSR
actually adds up to 1316 and not 666.

So the preterist calculation which
attributes 666 to Nero, however, is nothing more than a rather desperate
attempt to find some likely candidate for the Antichrist other than the
Papacy.

THE WORD ANTI-

Look
up in Strong's Concordance word 473 in the Greek dictionary. You will
find the the word anti is often used to denote substitution-

473.
anti, an-tee'; a prim. particle; opposite, i.e. instead or because of
(rarely in addition to):--for, in the room of. Often used in composition
to denote contrast, requital, *substitution*, correspondence, etc.

An
example of how anti is used this way can be found in the words type and
antitype, which are used with respect to Bible prophecy. The "type" is
the pattern or symbol, and the antitype is the fulfillment. The Jewish
Passover was a "type" and the crucifixion of Jesus is the "antitype" or
fulfillment of the example of the type. You substitute the antitype into
the symbolism of the type to arrive at the complete meaning.

The Catholic Church has essentially confirmed this usage of the word anti. In the 1994 Catholic Almanac
on page 158 there is "the list of men who claimed or exercised the
papal office in an uncanonical manner." So these men tried to substitute
themselves for the true Pope, and usurp that office, so to speak. The
Catholic church denies the papal authority of the men on that list
because they attempted a substitute (false) claim on the Papacy. That
list is a list of ANTI-POPES! So the word anti can clearly mean a
substitute for something.

THE WORD ANTICHRIST

Antichrist
(word 500 in Strong's Greek dictionary) can be correctly interpreted
then, as someone who substitutes himself for Jesus Christ, the Son of
God, just as an antipope substituted himself into the office of the
Papacy.

The Vicar of Christ (Vicarius Christi)

"Vicar
of Christ . . . Title used almost exclusively of the Bishop of Rome as
successor of Peter and, therefore, the one in the Church who
particularly takes the place of Christ; but used also of bishops in
general and even of priests. First used by the Roman Synod of A.D. 495
to refer to Pope Gelasius; more commonly in Roman curial usage to refer
to the Bishop of Rome during the pontificate of Pope Eugene III
(1145-1153). Pope Innocent III (1198-1216) asserted explicitly that the
Pope is the Vicar of Christ; further defined at the Council of Florence
in the Decree for the Greeks (1439) and Vatican Council I in Pastor Aerternus (1870). The Second Vatican Council, in Lumen Gentium
, n.27, calls bishops in general "vicars and legates of Christ." All
bishops are vicars of Christ for their local churches in their
ministerial functions as priest, prophet, and king, as the Pope is for
the universal church; the title further denotes they exercise their
authority in the Church not by delegation from any other person, but
from Christ Himself."

Now look up the word vicarious in almost any common dictionary. Here is what you would find in the Webster Handy College Dictionary: "substituting for or, feeling in place of another."

Also in the Webster's II New Riverside Desk Dictionary for the definition of Vicar-

1. A parish priest in the Church of England.2. A cleric in the Episcopal Church in charge of a chapel.3. One who serves as a *substitute* for another.

A
Vicar General is defined in the 1994 Catholic Almanac on page 330 as "a
priest or bishop appointed by the bishop of a diocese to serve as his
deputy, with ordinary executive power, in the administration of the
diocese." So a vicar serves in the place of (substituting for) the
bishop, and assumes his power of office for certain duties.

So
the Papal title of VICAR OF CHRIST which in Latin is VICARIUS CHRISTI,
means a SUBSTITUTE FOR CHRIST, which is synonymous with Antichrist,
i.e., assuming the power of God on earth! This blasphemous claim is made
repeatedly by various Popes and is the very foundation of Roman
Catholicism and it's Papacy.

Some Catholics may protest that the Pope represents, but does not substitute for Jesus Christ, to avoid the association.

Now, from the Webster Hand College Dictionary, the definition of the word represent:

Another Catholic apologist, Karl Keating of the organization Catholic Answers, in a debate in the fall of 1989 with Jose Ventilacion of Iglesia ni Cristo, stated the following:

The whole Iglesia argument
against the Catholic Church is a big fraud, and let me prove it
to you, from Pasugo [God's
Message]. I mentioned in my
opening remarks, Iglesia is so
fond of claiming that the Pope is the beast of Revelation. We
know that the beast of Revelation has the number 666, right?

Now here is the argument,
follow this carefully. The Pope's have what is known as a tiara,
that means a triple crown, a triply high crown, three levels.
The beast can be identified. You find a man whose name, when
added up adds up to 666, or a man whose title adds up to 666.
Now, Iglesia ni Cristo says two things. One, that the title of
the Pope, in Latin, is Vicarius Filii Dei, and second, that that
title appears on the three bands of the tiara. I have in front
of me a photo copy of the September 1976 issue of Pasugo. Here is a drawing
made by the staff showing the tiara with those words on it. This
is just a pen drawing. Two things to say. Does the title
Vicarius Filii Dei add up to 666? Yes it does. But, is that a
title of the Popes? Have they ever
used it? No.

Do you know what Vicarius
Filii Dei means? It means vicar, or representative, or agent,
Vicar of the Son of God. The Pope has never
used that title. No Pope ever.
The official title of the pope, one of several, is Vicar of
Christ, not Vicar
of the Son of God. We Catholics claim he is the representative
on earth of the God-man the Messiah, not
of the second person of the Trinity as such. But you see, the
Vicar of Christ, in Latin, is Vicarius Christi, and when you add
up the letters, they don't add up to 666.

So the first thing, the first
thing, that the Iglesia ni Cristo has done, and as I say, it
repeats this story
every four issues or so in its magazine. The first thing is to
claim that the title of the Pope is Vicarius Filii Dei. That's a lie. It's not
at all. Why does it claim that? Because it wants to
find a title that adds up to 666. It doesn't care about the
truth!

The following evidence is prove positive that VICARIUS FILII DEI is
indeed genuine.

VICARIUS FILII DEIThe Historical Proof.

TheDonation of Constantineis
the most famous forgery in European history, and was discovered in the
Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals in the 9th century (c. 847-853). The forger
is thought to have been Johannes Hymonides (John
the Deacon of the 9th century). The Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals are
fictitious letters alleged to be from early popes [Clement (A.D. 100) to
Gregory the Great (A.D. 600)], collected by Isidore Mercator in the 9th
century. Since the scholarly criticism of the fifteenth century they
have been known to be forgeries and have been called "Pseudo-Isidorian
Decretals" or False Decretals, to acknowledge that they are fraudulent.

The donation reads in part as follows in Latin: (caps added for emphasis) -

...
as the Blessed Peter is seen to have been constituted vicar of the Son
of God on the earth, so the Pontiffs who are the representatives of that
same chief of the apostles, should obtain from us and our empire the
power of a supremacy greater than the clemency of our earthly imperial
serenity is seen to have conceded to it,(continuing beyond the Latin above)choosing
that same chief of the apostles and his vicars to be our constant
intercessors with God. And to the extent of our earthly Imperial power,
we have decreed that his holy Roman Church shall be honored with
veneration, and that more than our empire and earthly throne the most
sacred seat of the Blessed Peter shall be gloriously exalted, we giving
to it power, and dignity of glory, and vigor, and honor imperial. And we
ordain and decree that he shall have the supremacy as well over the
four principal seats, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and
Constantinople, as also over all the churches of God in the whole earth.
And the Pontiff, who at the time shall be at the head of the holy Roman
church itself, shall be more exalted than, and chief over, all the
priests of the whole world, and according to his judgment everything
which is provided for the service of God and for the stability of the
faith of Christians is to be administered.

The Donation of Constantine has two parts, the first relates the alleged
conversion story of Constantine to the Christian faith, and is called
the "Confessio". The second part, called the "Donatio", lists the
authority, privileges and property bestowed on the papacy by the
emperor. It was later incorporated into most of the medieval collections
of Catholic canon law (Anselm's, Cardinal Deusdedit's (c. 1087), and Gratian's Decretum (c. 1148) also known as Concordia Discordantium Canonum).

At right is the page of Gratian's Decretum printed in 1512 with
the title vicarius filii dei indicated by the arrow. The entire volume
is online at Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, the title appears on photo 201.

The
Donation of Constantine was cited in writing by no less than 10 Popes
as proof of their civil authority and sovereignty over Rome, and what
came to be known as the Papal States, which included a large portion of
Italy. It was also eventually exposed as a pious fraud in 1440 by Laurentius Vallawho proved the donation had to have been written several centuries after the death of Constantine (337 A.D.) The Vatican condemned Valla's scholarly work by listing it in the Index Librorum Prohibitorum, the Index of Prohibited Books of 1559 (a 1569 printing at Google books), and as late as 1580 the official edition of the Corpus Juris upheld the genuineness of the False Decretals. So the Donation of Constantine was held to be genuine for centuries.

Catholics finally abandoned the defense of the authenticity of the Donation of Constantine shortly after Cesare Baronius published his Annales Ecclesiastici
in 1592, which admitted the fraud, although the Donation and title
Vicarius Filii Dei continued to appear in Canon law and other Catholic
publications well into the 19th century.

[Pg. 206] In his Annales Ecclesiastici (published 1588-1607)
written in advocacy of the papacy and the Catholic Church, he [Baronius]
took the position that the falsity of the Donation had been proven and,
abandoning its defence, discussed it as a forgery. 2 ...
[Pg. 207] ... Starting with his apologetic attitude on behalf of the
papacy, and the existence of Greek texts of the Donation, he advanced
the theory that Greeks had perpetrated the forgery and used it to
establish the antiquity of the See of Constantinople.2 Under the year 324, nos. 117-123.Cf. also A. D. 1191, no 51.

VICARIUS FILII DEI USED BY POPE LEO IX IN AN OFFICIAL LETTER THAT RESULTED IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BEING SPLIT IN TWO!

According to the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia entry on the Donation of Constantine:

The first pope who used it in an official act and relied upon it, was Leo IX; in a letter of 1054 to Michael Cærularius, Patriarch of Constantinople, he cites the "Donatio" to show that the Holy See possessed both an earthly and a heavenly imperium,
the royal priesthood. ... Gregory VII himself never quoted this
document in his long warfare for ecclesiastical liberty against the
secular power. But Urban II made use of it in 1091 to support his claims
on the island of Corsica. Later popes (Innocent III, Gregory IX,
Innocent IV) took its authority for granted (Innocent III, Sermo de sancto Silvestro,
in P.L., CCXVII, 481 sqq.; Raynaldus, Annales, ad an. 1236, n. 24;
Potthast, Regesta, no. 11,848), and ecclesiastical writers often adduced
its evidence in favour of the papacy. The medieval adversaries of the
popes, on the other hand, never denied the validity of this appeal to
the pretended donation of Constantine ... The authenticity of the
document, as already stated, was doubted by no one before the fifteenth
century.

The text of the letter of Leo IX to Michael Cærularius, "In terra pax hominibus", is cited in the following work: Several Tracts Against Popery, by Michael Geddes, LL.D., London, 1715. See pages 12 - 20.

In this letter, which the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia deems an official act,
Pope Leo IX was asserting his primacy as the Bishop of Rome, and to
that end he reproduced that portion of the donation containing vicarius
filii Dei (see page 12 at left below) for the edification of the Greek
Patriarch. In the prologue of his citation of the donation, Leo IX said,
in affirming the donation as genuine:

"But lest perhaps", saith Leo,
"some Scruple may still remain with you concerning it's earthly
Domination, (that is the Papacy's) and that you may not so much as
lightly suspect, that the holy Roman See seeks to vindicate and
defend its unshaken Honour with foolish and old Wives Fables, we will
here produce a few Privileges which were confirmed by the Hand of the
said Constantine, ... by which Truth will be confirmed, ... we do not follow learned Fables, but do manifest unto you the Power of Our Lord Jesus Christ [2
Pet. 1:16], ... Know ye that the same glorious Prince in the aforesaid
Privilege, did, ... thus promulgate the special Dignity of the Roman Church". (pgs. 18, 19)

As Geddes says:

"Was there ever any Truth spoke of with more Assurance, or with a greater Air of Devotion, than Constantine's Donation, and the Roman Church's never having made use of Fables, as spoke of here by Leo." "As Leo
is, you see, in his Prologue to this Donation, very peremptory that it
is authentick, so he triumphs in his Epilogue to it, as if its being so
were made indubitable by him, saying," ... 'Wherefore Truth being
supported by these and many more such Testimonies, does not blush, but
impudent Vanity is confounded.' "If this Pope had any Shame in
him, he would never have ventured on this Occasion to have spoke either
of Blushing or of Impudence; or if he had had any Religion, would he
have dared to have made such a Grimace as this."
"For as if he himself believed all that he saith here so positively, and
with so great an Air of Religion, concerning these Donations being
indubitably authentick, he was certainly the simplest and most credulous
Man that ever put Pen to Paper: So if he did not believe it himself, as
it is more than probable he did not, he was a most profane and vile
Hypocrite to cant about it, as he does. However, what this Pope saith
here so dogmatically of the Instrument of Constantine's Donation, and its being authentick, ought to be remembered." (pgs. 19, 20)

The letter begins with the Intitulatio:
"Leo episcopus, servus servorum Dei", which is characteristic of
official papal bulls. It was addressed to Michael Cærularius,
Patriarch of Constantinople, and Leo, Metropolitan of Achrida, and
was in response to a letter sent by Leo, Metropolitan of Achrida to
John, Bishop of Tranum (Bulgaria), that categorically attacked the
customs of the Latin Church that differed from those of the Greeks.
Especially criticized were the Roman traditions of fasting on the
Saturday Sabbath and consecration of unleavened bread. Leo IX in
his letter accused Constantinople of historically being the source of
heresy and claimed in emphatic terms the primacy of the Bishop of Rome
over even the Patriarch of Constantinople*, who would have none of it.
After Leo's assertion of primacy was summarily rejected, Patriarch
Cærularius was excommunicated by papal legates who entered
Constantinople's St. Sophia during the liturgy on July 16, 1054, and
publicly threw down the Bull that anathematized Cerularius on the altar
table. By that dramatic act, the Church was split in two in the Great
Schism that has ever since divided East and West.

* "Pope Leo IX. cites long extracts of it [the Donation] in his letter to
Michael Cerularius, patriarch of Constantinople, in 1054, in order to
establish against the Greeks the spiritual and temporal jurisdiction of
the Holy See.2"— The Power of the Pope During the Middle Ages, by M. Gosselin, Vol. 1., Translated by Rev. Matthew Kelly, London, pg. 318.

Pope Innocent III popularized the title "Vicar of Jesus Christ".
In Inter corporalia, he claimed that as the Vicar of Jesus
Christ, only the Roman Pontiff could remove or transfer bishops, because
he acted not with human, but with divine power and authority reserved
for the Roman Pontiff alone:

For it is not by human but rather divine power that
spiritual marriage is dissolved, when as by translation or cession
by the authority of the Bishop of Rome (Whom it is known to be the
Vicar of Jesus Christ) a Bishop is removed from his Church: These
three are reserved to the Roman Pontiff alone—not so much by
Canonical institution as by Divine institution.

In Licet in tantum, Pope Innocent III stated that he was the successor of Peter and Vicar of Jesus Christ:

For instance, man can not overthrow
the bond of a legitimate marriageof husband and wife, the Lord saying in
the Gospel, That which God hath joined together, let not man put asunder
(Matt. xix, 6): so also is the spiritual covenant of marriage, which is
between the bishop and the church, which begins in the election, is
ratified in confirmation and in the consecration is completed, it is
understood, can not be dissolved without the authority of he who is the
successor of Peter, and the vicar of Jesus Christ.

Now, therefore, you see this servant, who is appointed over the
family, verily the vicar of Jesus Christ, the successor of Peter, the
Lord's Anointed, the God of Pharaoh, placed in the middle between God
and man, this side of God, but beyond man, inferior to God,
but greater than man: who judges all, and is judged of no man: The
Apostles affirming voice, "he who judges me is the Lord." (1 Cor 4:4)

St. John Lateran Cathedral figures prominently in
Bible prophecy as it has the official "cathedra" or throne of the Bishop
of Rome, it is the oldest or "Mother" church of Christendom, and it was
in fact formerly the palace of the emperor, bequeathed to the Pope when
Constantine vacated Rome for Constantinople, leaving the Bishop of Rome
to fill the vacuum. This is mentioned in both the Donation and in the
book of Revelation:

Rev 13:2 And the beast [papal
Rome] which I saw was like unto a leopard [Greece], and his feet were as
the feet of a bear [Medo-Persia], and his mouth as the mouth of a lion
[Babylon]: and the dragon [pagan Rome / Satan] gave him [the papacy] his
power, and his seat [cathedra, St. John Lateran], and great authority.

At left is Pope Benedict XVI on the throne in the apse of St.
John Lateran Cathedral, formerly the palace of Emperor Constantine the
Great, now the official cathedra of the Bishop of Rome. St. John Lateran
is located on one of the seven hills of Rome. See: What Does The Word Vatican Mean?

Vicar of GodPope Nicholas II — 1278 — Fundamenta
Militantis Ecclesiae

"Vicar of Christ (Lat. Vicarius Christi), a
title of the pope implying his supreme and universal primacy, both of
honour and of jurisdiction, over the Church of Christ. ... The title
Vicar of God used for the pope by Nicholas III is employed as an
equivalent for Vicar of Christ." — Vicar of Christ entry, Catholic Encyclopedia, 1913, Volume 15, pg. 403.

In Fundamenta Militantis Ecclesiae, a papal constitution
issued on July 18, 1278, Pope Nicholas III decreed that the city of
Rome was to be governed by a senate composed of Roman citizens, but only
with his express papal approval. (see this book)

Pope Nicolaus IV in a
letter dated July 13th, 1289,
inviting Caydonius the Tatar to embrace the Christian faith, assured
him that the Roman Pontiff's office of Vicar of Jesus Christ the Son of
God was in fact a divine appointment:

Agostino Trionfo of Ancona (Augustinus
Triumphus) 1243-1328 A.D.Summa de potestate
ecclesiastica (Summary On The Power Of The Church)

Trionfo was expressly commissioned by Pope John
XXII to produce a book that would set forth and defend the
ecclesiastical and temporal authority of the papacy. The result
was Summa de potestate ecclesiastica, which was completed
in the year 1320 and dedicated to the same Pope, and is
considered the high water mark of papal pretentions.

The Summa de potestate ecclesiastica
of Augustinus Triumphus has been described as 'one of the
half dozen most influential and most important books ever
written' on the nature of the papal supremacy in the Middle
ages, 1...1 C. H. McIlwain, The Growth of
Political Thought in the West (London, 1932), p. 278.
— The Problem
of Sovereignty in the Later Middle Ages: The Papal Monarchy
with Augustinus Triumphus and the Publicists by Michael
Wilks, Cambridge University Press, 2008, ISBN 052107018X,
9780521070188,
p. 2

Augustinus' Summa de potestate
ecclesiastica is an extensive treatise, counting over
600 double column pages in the early printed editions. It
consists of 112 questions, divided into three major parts.
There are at least twenty-four extant manuscripts of the
complete work, and another fifteen containing fragments. The
Summa received five editions in the fifteenth
century, and the four successive editions in Rome, beginning
in 1582 and ending in 1585, which was the last edition of
Augustinus' work. —
High Way To Heaven, The Augustinian Platform Between Reform
and Reformation, 1292-1524, by
Eric Leland Saak, Leiden; Boston, MA: Brill, 2002,
page 50.

The
University of Maryland claims 29 editions of Summa
were published between 1320 and 1584 in Latin, and it is held by
55 libraries worldwide.

Note that Summa
was coming off the presses of Rome during the early years of the
Catholic Church's enforcement of the Tridentine Index of Forbidden Books
(Index Librorum Prohibitorum), which began in 1546 under Pope
Pius IV and the Council of Trent, and remained in effect for over 300
years. The 1582 printing is prefaced by an endorsement by F. Augustinus
Fiuizanius Romanus, Sacrista, Et Ordinis Augustiniani, Vicarius
Generalis, under the name of Pope Gregory XIII. The crest of Pope
Gregory XIII, with the winged dragon, appears on the title page, as shown below. In Summa, Agostino applied Vicarius Filii Dei to the papacy.

Refer to the following guide for the Latin and corresponding English for each edition of Summa. The Latin spelling varies slightly depending on abbreviations used.

Question 36 Ad 7, ... ut sicut beatus Petrus in terris vicarius filii Dei
esse videtur constitutus, ... [... as the Blessed Peter is seen to have
been constituted vicar of the Son of God on the earth, ...] (Quote of
Donation of Constantine)

Question 43 Ad 3, ... ut sicut beatus Petrus in terris vicarius filii Dei
esse videtur constitutus, ... [... as the Blessed Peter is seen to have
been constituted vicar of the Son of God on the earth, ...] (Quote of
Donation of Constantine)

Question 45 Ad 2, ... quòd Papa vicarius lesu Christi, vice Dei
viventis, in toto orbe terrarum spiritualium, & temporalium habet
universalum iurisdictionem: ..." [... the fact is the Pope is the vicar
of Jesus Christ, in the place of the living God, has universal spiritual
and temporal jurisdiction of the entire globe of the earth: ...]

Dr.
Johannes Quasten (1900-1987), a renowned Catholic patristics scholar,
considered perhaps the greatest authority in this field, when questioned
in 1943 about Vicarius Filii Dei, freely admitted in writing that "The
title Vicarius Filii Dei as well as the title Vicarius Christi
is very common as the title for the Pope." So, it is reasonable
to assume that Dr. Quasten was indeed aware of the title appearing in Summa, and in Leo IX's letter, thus his concession that it is very common. See The Search to Document and Authenticate Vicarius Filii Dei.

These extraordinary and blasphemous claims in Summa deserve special attention:

Second reason considering the role of the Pope. Only the Pope is said
to be the Vicar of God: because he alone is able to bind and loose,
possessing alone loosing and binding given to him by God. The decision
of the Pope and the decision of God constitute one decision, just as the
decision of the Pope and his disciple are the same. Since, therefore,
an appeal is always taken from an inferior judge to a superior, as no
one is greater than himself, so no appeal holds when made from the Pope
to God, because there is one consistory of the Pope himself and of God
Himself, of which consistory the Pope himself is the key-bearer and the
doorkeeper. Therefore no one can appeal from the Pope to God, as no one
can enter into the consistory of God without the mediation of the Pope,
who is the key-bearer and the doorkeeper of the consistory of eternal
life; and as no one can appeal to himself, so no one can appeal from the
Pope to God, because there is one decision and one court of God, and
the Pope.

So
proceeding on the first point. It is to be seen as fact that the honor
that is due Christ as God is due also to the Pope: because the honor is
due the power, and the power of Christ as God and the [power of the]
Pope are one, which is shown to be true.

So, from the
first apparent use of Vicarius Filii Dei by a Pope in an official act
in 1054 A.D., to the last printed edition of Trionfo's Summa de potestate ecclesiastica in 1585 in Rome, is a of 531 years.

THE POPE CHANGED SABBATH TO SUNDAY

Satan's
policy in this final conflict with God's people is the same that he
employed in the opening of the great controversy in heaven. He professed
to be seeking to promote the stability of the divine government, while
secretly bending every effort to secure its overthrow. And the very work
which he was thus endeavoring to accomplish he charged upon the loyal
angels. The same policy of deception has marked the history of the Roman
Church. It has professed to act as the vicegerent of Heaven, while seeking to exalt itself above God and to change His law. (Great Controversy, 591)

Below is Question 50 (L) of Summa regarding the Third Commandment ( TERTII PRAECEPTI ) from the 1582 edition:

These
6 points regarding papal ability to grant dispensation, are proposing
that Pope's innately possess the authority to overrule the Sabbath
commandment of God as written in the Bible, and so are able to change it
in any aspect, however they should decree.

Nunc considerandum est de dispesatione tertij praecepti.Now we must consider dispensation of the third commandment.

Circa quod queruntur sex.In regard to six arguments.

Primo, Utrum Papa possit dispensare, quòd dies Sabbati servetur secundum sensum spiritualem, non litteralem.First,
whether the pope can grant dispensation, that the Sabbath day should be
observed in a spiritual sense, not literal [according to the Bible].

Quarto, Utrum Papa debeat prohibere strictius opera servilia fieri in die Dominica, quàm fuerint prohibita in die Sabbati.Fourth, whether the Pope may strictly prohibit servile work on the Lord's day, as it was prohibited on the Sabbath.

History identifies the Pope that decreed the change from the Sabbath to Sunday as Sylvester I.

Augustinus Triumphus is also described as "a major canon lawyer of the 13th century, and a simply rabid defender of extreme papal supremacy." See also Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages entry on Augustine of Ancona. Here is some additional information regarding him:

The Problem of Sovereignty in the Later Middle Ages: The Papal Monarchy with Augustinus Triumphus and the PublicistsBy Michael WilksPublished by Cambridge University Press, 2008ISBN 052107018X, 9780521070188

The Summa de potestate ecclesiastica
of Augustinus Triumphus has been described as 'one of the half dozen
most influential and most important books ever written' on the nature of
the papal supremacy in the Middle ages, 1...

1 C. H. McIlwain, The Growth of Political Thought in the West (London, 1932), p. 278.

Triumphus,
an Italian, born in Ancona, 1243, made archbishop of Nazareth and died
at Naples, 1328, was a zealous advocate of Boniface VIII. His leading
treatise, The Power of the Church,—Summa de potestate ecclesiastica,
— vindicates John XXII. for his decision on the question of evangelical
poverty and for his opposition to the emperor’s dominion in Italy.155 The pope has unrestricted power on the earth. It is so vast that even he himself cannot know fully what he is able to do.156 His judgment is the judgment of God. Their tribunals are one.157
His power of granting indulgences is so great that, if he so
wished, he could empty purgatory of its denizens provided that
conditions were complied with.158

(4) Those vain, or rather lying, talkers say that all priests, whether
pope, archbishop or simple priest, are by Christ's appointment equal in
authority and jurisdiction; that, in so far as one has more than
another, this is according as the Emperor has conceded to one or
another either more or less; and that as he concedes to one, so he may
withdraw it, such doctrines as these are contrary to the truth, and
smack of heretical pravity.

The Christian Emperor Constantine testified, saying: the Blessed Peter
is seen to have been constituted vicar
of the Son of God on earth. From this it follows self-evidently that
Peter can be
called the supreme head of the universal Church according to the way
that holy Scripture explains it, as the ruler of a multitude is said to
be the head. So we read in Joel* [then follows a quote of Hosea 1:11
from the Vulgate] "Then shall the children of Judah and the children of
Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they
shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel."

John XXII
began his bull of 23 October 132738 with the words “Licet juxta
doctrinam,” by which it is named. Amongst other things, he “affirmed
that our Lord and His Apostles held true ownership in the temporal
things which they possessed, and that the goods of the Church were
not rightfully at the disposition of the emperor.”39
This document also deals with Petrine primacy, mingling Biblical
arguments with an appeal to the Donation. John XXII declared that
nobody should entertain any doubts about this matter, since
“Constantine, that most Christian emperor, at some time testified to
it, saying: It appears that the blessed Peter was appointed as the
vicarius Filii Dei on earth. From this it follows self-evidently that
Peter can be called the head of the universal
Church according
to the way that holy Scripture explains it . . .”40 In the
original, that key sentence—with a slightly different word
order—quotes familiar words: “Hoc ille imperator Christianissimus
Constantinus testatus est dicens: Beatus Petrus videtur in terris
vicarius Dei filii constitutus. Ex hoc etiam sequitur evidenter,
quod Petrus caput universalis Ecclesiae potest dici juxta morem
illum sacrae Scripturae . . .”41
Eisenschmid’s Römisches Bullarium translates the title as
Statthalter des Sohnes Gottes.42

We
likewise define that the holy Apostolic See, and the Roman Pontiff,
hold the primacy throughout the entire world; and that the Roman Pontiff
himself is the successor of blessed Peter, the chief of the Apostles,
and the true vicar of Christ, and that he is the head of the entire
Church, and the father and teacher of all Christians; and that full
power was given to him in blessed Peter by Our Lord Jesus Christ, to
feed, rule, and govern the universal Church; just as is contained in the
acts of the ecumenical Councils and in the sacred canons."

Similarly
we too to whom, though unworthy, the lord Jesus Christ has deigned to
entrust his people, as we hear of the abominable crime that certain
wicked men dwelling in Basel have plotted in these days so as to breach
the unity of holy church, and since we fear that they may seduce some of
the unwary by their deceits and inject them with their poisons, are
forced to proclaim in like words to the people of our lord Jesus Christ
entrusted to us, depart from the tents of these wicked men, particularly
since the Christian people is far more numerous than the Jewish people
of those days, the church is holier than the synagogue, and the vicar of
Christ is superior in authority and status even to Moses. (Source)

An
execrable, and in former ages unheard-of abuse, has sprung up in our
time, namely that some people, imbued with the spirit of rebellion,
presume to appeal to a future Council, from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar
of Jesus Christ, to whom it was said in the person of blessed Peter:
"Feed my sheep" and "Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound
also in Heaven"; they do not do so because they are anxious to obtain
sounder judgment, but in order to escape the consequences of their sins,
and anyone who is not ignorant of the laws can realize how contrary
this is to the sacred canons and how detrimental to the Christian
community. (Source)

§.3. ... in the militant Church, which resembleth the
triumphant, there is one moderator and judge of all, the vicar of Jesus Christ,
from whom, as from the head, all power and authority is derived to the subject
members; the which doth immediately flow into it from the Lord Christ. (Source).

§.10. ... in one flock, the
fold was contained, even just as at the present day they are contained, that
there is one bridal chamber of Christ, the one bride, the one fold, and one
shepherd, and one overseer of all the Bishops, the Bishop of Rome, the successor
of blessed Peter, and Vicar of Jesus Christ.

... this all the Christian people, that all people,
all the kings, all the clergy, all the Bishops venerated as their leader the
Vicar of Jesus Christ, blessed Peter's successor, the Head and rector of the
universal Church.

In 1559 in Venice, Alphonsus Alvarez Guerrero, a
Spanish civil and canon lawyer noted for his expertise (bene peritus) in antiquities of the church, and advisor to King Philip II of Spain in Naples Italy, published his Thesaurus Christianae Religiones
(Treasure store of the Christian Religion), a detailed exposition of
the powers, rights and duties of Christian authorities, civil and
spiritual. He twice applied the title Vicarius Filii Dei to the Pope,
asserting the authority of the Pope over the Holy Roman Emperor (Imperator Romanorum),
a title granted by the Pope, at his discretion, to the German kings via
a formal ceremonial crowning. The first such crowning of the German
king Otto I by Pope Johannes XII in 962 was referred to as the translatio imperii. Based on that papal sanctioned transfer of power to the Germans, Pope Innocent III in 1202 claimed continuing authority to examine, anoint, consecrate and crown each German king as he saw fit, in the bull Venerabilem fratrem nostrum (Our brother worthy of respect). The text of the bull in Latin.

After
God's Chief Apostle has given his approbation, ... with which it is
evident the Roman Emperor is lord or universal protector of Christians,
etc., ... supreme power is from God, and next the pope, who is the Vicar
of the Son of God.

With this notwithstanding,
the power of confirmation has always been accorded to the Lord pope,
who is the Vicar of the Son of God: notwithstanding because this (papal
confirmation) is not known when Emperors have previously been faithless.

Rev 17:18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

Cardinal Juan de Torquemada — 1561 — Summa de Ecclesia

Juan de Torquemada was a Spanish theologian and member of
the Dominican Order. His monumental Summa de Ecclesia defended papal
supremecy and infallibilty, and strongly opposed the conciliarists. Thomas
Torquemada, the Grand Inquisitor, was his nephew.

To the second objection concerning the donation of Constantine, it is
answered by a minor denial. The Roman pontiff does not have his primacy
by Constantine, but by Christ to blessed Peter and Peter's successors,
as said in John: Feed my sheep. (John 21:16-17) And for proof concerning
c. Constantine dist - 96. the answer is that in the entire c. can not
conclude that by Constantine the Roman pontiff had primacy, Constantine
says that blessed Peter and his successor the Roman Pontiff inherited
this primacy from Christ, to whom he said, Thus and so. The blessed
Peter is said to be appointed as the Vicar of the Son of God
on earth, &c. hence, he [Constantine] did not give the privilege of
primacy to the Roman pontiff, but he believed it a command from Christ,
to be observed and honored by all the churches of the world, thus
showing that he [Constantine] is not the author of [papal] primacy, but
rather the executor of the law as Christ ordained, as has been said
above in chapter. 41.

And if the Pope can
not order, nor dispense contrary to the law of God, of the Old and New
Testament, even though he is of Christ, Vicar of the Almighty Son of
God, according to this: Thou art Peter, etc., I will give thee the keys
of the kingdom of heaven. The Emperor is less able to dispense contrary
to the Old Testament, and New ...

B. Antonini Archiepiscopi Florentini — 1581 — Summa
Sacrae Theologiae

In 1581, Volume 3 of Summa Theologicae by the Archbishop of Florence, Saint Anthony
(1389 - 1459), was published in Venice. Title 22, chapter 5,
section 16 deals with the Donation of Constantine and quotes it, to
include Vicarius Filii Dei, on the page numbered 401. Then in section 22
on page 403, the title is applied to the pope as follows:

And
as much as to the first, since the pope is vicar of the Son of God, as
that God made the creatures as if by means of the mediation of secondary
causes, the whole he could do directly by himself, so the pope has at
least as much power of jurisdiction. Similarly, he can govern directly
all the faithful, or by means of the ministers of the Church.

Andreas Helwig — 1612 — Antichristus Romanus

In 1612 he also publishedAntichristus Romanus, in proprio suo nomine, numerum illum
Apocalypticum (DCLXVI) continente proditus,
— Roman Antichrist, particular names that total the
Apocalyptic Number 666, that contain treachery, in
Wittenberg, which also identified Vicarius Filii Dei. — The
contribution of British writers between 1560 and 1830 to the
Interpretation of Revelation 13:16-18, By
David Brady, J.C.B Mohr, Tubingen, 1983,
pgs. 84-85.

"Helwig shows that the mystic name
(1) must yield the required number; (2) must agree with the
papal order; (3) must not be a vile name applied by enemies,
but acceptable to Antichrist himself; and (4) must be one of
which he can boast. Helwig takes Vicarius Filii Dei as an expansion or equivalent of the
officially used shorter papal title Vicarius Christi,
and shows that it conforms to these four requirements,
citing Sleidanus in his Commentariis Suis Historicis,
lib. 2, for the decretal of Aeneas Sylvias, which employs
the title Vicarius Christi only.

3. EXPLAINS CHOICE OF VICARIUS FILII
DEI.—Explaining his emphasis of Vicarius Filii Dei, Helwig
checks it by his four rules: "

"But behold this present
[name] (Vicarius Filii Dei) in every way is such as is
required. For first, it is a Latin name, and most exactly
renders with significant letters that Apocalyptic number;
then it harmonizes wholly and always with the papal order in
itself (even though by hypothesis [ex hypothesi]), as no
pontiff denies; then it is not offensive or vile as imposed
upon him by adversaries, but is especially honorable to this
very one, venerable, and formidable to others: which all the
pontiffs have now already ascribed to themselves for more
than 600 years (as is apparent), and do ascribe today, and
wish to be ascribed: on which account they vehemently glory
and boast with an execrable voice that they hold, shared as
it were with the omnipotent God, the rule throughout the
earth in human affairs. This [is] what, among other things
(for who may investigate all the swelling words of papal
bulls?), that decretal of Pope Aeneas Sylvius (who wished
later to be called Pius) makes clearly evident—[that
decretal] published in the year 1459 at Mantua which John
Sleidan notes in his historical commentaries, vol. 2—in
which he [the pope] took care that nobody should appeal from
the pope to a Council because he said that, in the nature of
things, nothing greater could be found above the Vicar of
Christ."
[See
Execrabilis
above] — Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol.
02, by Le Roy Edwin Froom, 1948, Review and Herald, pg. 607.
See
605-608, for more quotes of Helwig.

That's 546 years from Pope Leo IX's letter to the first public
revelation in 1600 that the phrase equaled 666, 546 years that Vicarius
Filii Dei would not have been denied as applying to the Pope by anyone
in the Roman Catholic Church, and even so, it continued to appear in
Catholic canon law and other Catholic publications for additional
centuries.

In the Chapel of St. Sylvester (part of the Basilica of
Santi Quattro Coronati,
located in Rome on Coelian hill, between St. John Lateran and the
Coliseum), a series of frescoes commissioned by Pope Innocent IV, and
completed in 1246, depict various events in the life of Pope Sylvester
I.

The Donation of Constantine, Santi Quattro Coronati, Rome.

In
the fresco panels, shown above, Emperor Constantine is offering his
crown to the Pope, illustrating the Donation of Constantine, and in the
following panel, the triumphal Pope riding on horseback and wearing
Constantine's tiara, is led through Rome by the humbled Emperor, who is
on foot.

Another painting representing the
Donation of Constantine,
shown below,
is in the Vatican, in the Sala di Costantino. It was painted by Raphael
and his workshop from 1519 to 1525, along with depictions of
Constantine's baptism, his vision of the cross, and his victory at the
battle at Milvian bridge, so at the time it would seem the Donation of
Constantine was still considered to be genuine.

Detail of the Donation of Constantine as depicted in a painting byGianfrancesco Penni, in the Sala di Costantino, the Vatican.

For the whole painting, see
The Art of Renaissance Rome, by Loren Partridge,published by Harry N. Abrams, Inc., New York, A Times Mirror Company,Copyright 1996 by Calmann & King, Ltd., ISBN 0-8109-2718-7, page 158.

The
kneeling Constantine is handing Pope Sylvester I a statuette of Roma
Aeterna (eternal Rome) symbolizing the transfer of power from the
emperor to the papacy. On February 23, 1520, about four years before the
Raphael's painting of the Donation was completed, Martin Luther, in a
letter to Spalatin, wrote:

I have at hand Lorenzo
Valla's proof that the Donation of Constantine is a forgery. Good
heavens, what darkness and wickedness is at Rome. You wonder at the
judgment of God that such unauthentic, crass, imprudent lies not only
lived, but prevailed for so many centuries, that they were incorporated
in the canon law ... and became as articles of faith. I am in such a
passion that I scarcely doubt that the pope is the Antichrist expected
by the world, so closely do their acts, lives, sayings, and laws agree.

9. ... All these excessive,
over-presumptuous, and most wicked claims of the Pope are the invention
of the devil, with the object of bringing in antichrist in due course
and of raising the Pope above God, as indeed many have done and are now
doing. It is not meet that the Pope should exalt himself above temporal
authority, except in spiritual matters, such as preaching and
absolution; in other matters he should be subject to it, according to
the teaching of St. Paul (Rom. xiii.) and St. Peter (I Peter iii.), as I
have said above. He is not the vicar of Christ in heaven, but only of
Christ upon earth. For Christ in heaven, in the form of a ruler,
requires no vicar, but there sits, sees, does, knows, and commands all
things. But He requires him "in the form of a servant" to represent Him
as He walked upon earth, working, preaching, suffering, and dying. But
they reverse this: they take from Christ His power as a heavenly Ruler,
and give it to the Pope, and allow "the form of a servant" to be
entirely forgotten (Phil. ii. 7). He should properly be called the
counter-Christ, whom the Scriptures call antichrist; for his whole
existence, work, and proceedings are directed against Christ, to ruin
and destroy the existence and will of Christ.

It is also absurd
and puerile for the Pope to boast for such blind, foolish reasons, in
his decretal Pastoralis, that he is the rightful heir to the empire, if
the throne be vacant. Who gave it to him? Did Christ do so when He said,
"The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, but ye shall
not do so" (Luke xxii. 25, 26)? Did St. Peter bequeath it to him? It
disgusts me that we have to read and teach such impudent, clumsy,
foolish lies in the canon law, and, moreover, to take them for Christian
doctrine, while in reality they are mere devilish lies. Of this kind
also is the unheard-of lie touching the "donation of Constantine." It
must have been a plague sent by God that induced so many wise people to
accept such lies, though they are so gross and clumsy that one would
think a drunken boor could lie more skillfully. How could preaching,
prayer, study, and the care of the poor consist with the government of
the empire? These are the true offices of the Pope, which Christ imposed
with such insistence that He forbade them to take either coat or scrip
(Matt. x. 10), for he that has to govern a single house can hardly
perform these duties. Yet the Pope wishes to rule an empire and to
remain a pope. This is the invention of the knaves that would fain
become lords of the world in the Pope's name, and set up again the old
Roman empire, as it was formerly, by means of the Pope and name of
Christ, in its former condition.

In the controversial Bull "Sacratissimo uti culmine" (As though in the most sacred heights -
English translation) of John XXII, dated 3 March, 1322, or
Bulla Sabbatina,
John XXII affirmed an indulgence for members of the Carmelite Order.
Wearers of the Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, known also as the
brown scapular, are promised to be quickly freed from the flames of
purgatory, at least by the Saturday after their death. The Bull states:

O John, O John, Vicar of
my well-beloved Son, I shall snatch thee, as it were, from thy foe. Thee
who art Pope, I make my Vicar for the solemn gift which I sought from My
Son and have obtained by my prayers. So, it behooveth thee to grant a
favor and confirmation to my holy and devout Order of Carmel, which took
its rise with Elias and Eliseus on the mountain of that name. Whoso
maketh profession, whoso observeth the Rule drawn up by my servant
Albert the Patriarch, whoso unfailing shows obedience thereunto and to
that which has been approved by my dear son Innocent, so that thou
mayest accept through the true Vicars of My Son on earth what My Son
hath ordained in Heaven: that he who shall have persevered in holy
obedience, poverty and chastity, or shall enter the Holy Order, shall be
saved....

[XIII] ...,
a few Privileges which were confirmed by the Hand of the said
Constantine, with a Cross of Gold laid upon the venerable Body of the
Celestial Key-bearer+, by which Truth will be confirmed, and
Vanity will be confounded: ... the same glorious Prince in the aforesaid
Privilege, did, after a clear and perfect Confession of the Christian
Faith, and a curious Commendation of his Baptism, thus promulgate the
special Dignity of the Holy Roman Church, saying
[quote of Donation of Constantine]:
We — together with all our satraps, and the whole senate and my nobles,
and also all the people subject to the government of glorious Rome —
considered it advisable, that as the Blessed Peter is seen to have been
constituted vicar of the Son of God on the earth, so the Pontiffs who
are the representatives of that same chief of the apostles, should obtain from
us and our empire the power of a supremacy greater than the clemency of
our earthly imperial serenity is seen to have conceded to it, choosing
that same chief of the apostles and his vicars to be our constant
intercessors with God.

+According to Liber Pontificalis, Constantine exhumed the remains of Saint Peter and placed the coffin in a sarcophagus of bronze, with a gold
cross set above it that weighed 150 pounds.This author lists Vicarius Filii Dei and vicarii Dei with forms of vicarius Christi as functional equivalents.

Vincent Houdry, Society of Jesus —
1767

When
Honorius II died in 1130, two rival groups of Cardinals elected 2 popes,
Innocent II and
Anacletus II, which took 8 years to resolve. In the end, Innocent II was declared the valid pope by St. Bernard of Clairvaux.

As
to great authority which Saint Bernard had in the Church, and the
knowledge of it should be noted, when Pope Honorius died, the votes in
the election of a successor had in an amazing way gone two different
directions. Then there was to be seen on the same body two heads, upon
the same throne two Princes over the same subjects of the Lord; in the
same fold two Shepherds; one surreptitious, the other legitimate; there a
usurper, here the true Vicar of the Son of God.

The Vatican's Salone Sistino

Named for Pope Sixtus V (1585-1590) who commissioned its construction, the Salone Sistino (or
Apostolic Library)
is on the top floor of the building that s the north end of the Cortile
del Belvedere from east to west, connecting the Belvedere and the
Vatican Palace. Richly decorated by Giovani Guerra, Cesare Nebbia, and
assistants, there are several frescoes of note. On the east end of the
grand hall, there is a
fresco of the First Nicean Council of 325 A.D. Beneath the fresco is the inscription:

The
inscription states that Pope Silvester I and Emperor Flavius
Constantine declare Christ the Son and God the Father consubstantial,
condemning the Arian heresy. In the fresco, Bishop Hosius of Cordoba is
presiding and is seated at top center. He is flanked by Pope Sylvester's
legates, Victor and Vincentius. The crowned emperor Constantine, who
convened the council, is seated in the left center foreground, and
Christ and God the Father are seated in a cloud at top left.

At the opposite, or west end of the Salone Sistino, is another set of 3
related frescoes on the center pilaster between the arched doorways. On
the left side of the pilaster (Christ's right hand) is a Pope standing
with triple cross and tiara, with the inscription:

CHRISTI
· DOMINI VICARIVS

The center fresco depicts Christ seated. Over His head is A[lpha] ET
Ω[mega], in His hand is an open book that reads EGO SVM A ET Ω -
PRINCIPIVM ET FINIS, and at His feet is the inscription:

IESVS
· CHRISTVS
· SVMMVS
· MAGISTERCAELESTIS
· DOCTRINAE· AVCTOR

See the
illustration in
Orazio Gentileschi and the Poetic Tradition in Caravaggesque Painting, by R. Ward Bissell, Pennsylvania State University Press, 1981, pg. 133.

The
fresco on the right side of the pilaster (Christ's left hand) depicts
an Emperor standing, with crown, sword, and blue mantle. The inscription
reads:

The Life of Pope Sixtus the Fifth,
translated from the Italian of Gregorio Leti, by Ellis Farneworth,
Dublin, 1779, pg. 520. (Identifies the Pope fresco as Sixtus V and the
other an Emperor)

The Sistine hall suffered severe damage December 22, 1931, when
central support columns and a large portion of the roof totally
collapsed and plunged through two floors, but it was completely rebuilt
and restored.

In 1793, and later editions, the book Apocalyptical Key. An Extraordinary Discourse on the Rise and Fall of the Papacy; ... by Robert Fleming (1660-1716), was reprinted with the assertion by the editor that VICARIVS FILII DEI was
inscribed over a door of the Vatican
(see pg. 48). The fresco of a Pope on the pilaster between the Vatican
Library and the Salone Sistino, while admittedly not having the exact
wording, and on a pilaster rather than over the door, is the closest
known example that may be the inscription referred to in this and other
books.

Lucius Ferraris,about 1755, wrote an elaborate multi-volume theological reference work or encyclopedia titled
Prompta Bibliotheca
in which he quoted the Donation of Constantine, including the phrase
Vicarius Filii Dei, in article 2 of the entry "Papa" (Pope). He cited
the revised canon law as his authority. Here is the cover page of volume
5, of an edition published in 1858, note that it carries the blessing
of Pope Gregory XVI - (SANCTISSIMI D. N. GREGORII XVI P.M.)

Ferraris' work was later revised, enlarged, and once
again published in Rome by the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide in
1890. In that edition, the document and papal title Vicarius Filii Dei
were still retained. (Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca (Rome, 1890), Vol. VI, p. 43, col. 2.)

According the
1913 Catholic Encyclopedia, a further revised edition of
Prompta Bibliotheca was published in Rome by the presses of the Vatican's Office of Propaganda in 1899.

...
there are Catholics who talk against the temporal power of the Pope,
either because they have been stunned by the clamours of a Protestant
people, or because they are white-hearted, and have not courage to stand
in the face of popular falsehood for an unpopular truth. The spirit of
Protestant England?its lawlessness, its pride, its contempt, and its enmity to the Church of God?has
made Catholics too to be cold-hearted, even when the Vicar of Jesus
Christ is insulted. We have need, then, to be upon our guard. It shall
happen once more with some, as it did when the Son of God was in His
Passion?they saw Him betrayed,
bound, carried away, buffeted, blindfolded, and scourged; they saw Him
carry His Cross to Calvary, then nailed upon it, and lifted up to the
scorn of the world; and they said, "If he be the king of Israel, let him
now come down from the cross, and we will believe him."* So in like
manner they say now, "See this Catholic Church, this Church of God,
feeble and weak, rejected even by the very nations called Catholic.
There is Catholic France, and Catholic Germany, and Catholic Italy,
giving up this exploded figment of the temporal power of the Vicar of
Jesus Christ." And

so, because the Church seems weak, and the
Vicar of the Son of God
is renewing the Passion of his Master upon earth, therefore we are
scandalized, therefore we turn our faces from him. Where, then, is our
faith? But the Son of God foretold these things when He said, "And now I
have told you, before it come to pass; that when it shall come to pass,
you may believe."*

...
Lastly, the only other point upon which I shall speak to is this. We
have already seen how the powers and glories of the Holy See have been
progressively unfolding; how the time of St. Gregory I. was a period of
apostolic missions, converting the nations to the faith; how the time of
St. Leo III. was a period

of
creating the Christian world; how the time of St. Gregory VII. was a
period of purifying the sanctuary of the Church; and how the time of
Alexander III. was a period of royalty of government and of
ecclesiastical order, when the divine power of the church directed, by a
firm and sacred authority, the civil powers of the world within the
sphere of the law of God and of obedience to the faith. Now I observe
these powers of the Holy See have been always rising, always
culminating. The temporal power in the hand of St. Gregory I. was a
fatherly and patriarchal rule over nations not as yet reduced to civil
order. In the hands of St. Leo III. it became a power of building
empires. In the hands of St. Gregory VII. it was a scourge to chasten
them. In the hands of Alexander III. it was a dynasty, ruling supremely,
in the name of God, over the powers of the world. And now in these
later times the temporal sovereignty has become a law of the conscience,
an axiom of the reason. Through long contests and denials it has passed
into consciences, intellects, and hearts of men. Like the great dogmas
of the Church, through controversy it has reached its analysis and
expression. It stands by the side of the Immaculate Conception a
theological certainty, if not a definition. So that I may say there
never was a time when the temporal power of the Vicar of the Son of God, though assailed as we see it, was more firmly rooted through-

out
the whole unity of the Catholic Church in the hearts and convictions of
its members; and that by a double process, not only by its own proper
evidence, not only by the light of God's dealing with the world, but by
contrast. For the nations of Europe have already seen that the society
of the world, without the guidance and preservation of the Church of
God, resolves itself into confusion. They have seen every form of
political society, and the confederations of kingdoms and nations,
dissolve and pass away. While all the floating societies of the world
have drifted down the stream, the centre of obedience has become more
stable. Men have learned from the history of modern Europe that the law
which is called the law of nations—that is, the rule of justice which
regulates the relations of people with people—has become weak and
powerless. And why? Because the nations have broken the bonds which
bound them to the centre of obedience, and have shaken off the noble
submission to a tribunal higher than man, from which came forth, in
other days, the judgments of equity and of justice. It was a dignified
obedience to bow to the Vicar of the Son of God, and to remit the arbitration of their griefs to one whom all wills consented to obey.

Source: The Temporal Power of the Vicar of Jesus Christ,
by Henry Edward Manning, D.D. (appointed Archbishop of Westminster in
1865 and Cardinal in 1875), second edition with a preface, published in
1862 in London by Burns & Lambert, 17 &18 Portman Street.

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning
— 1871
— The Vatican Council And Its Definitions

For
what is the temporal power, but the condition of peaceful independence
and supreme direction over all Christians, and all Christian so- [p.
166] cieties, inherent in the office of Vicar of Christ, and head of the
Christian Church? When the Civil powers became Christian, faith and
obedience restrained them from casting so much as a shadow of human
sovereignty over the Vicar of the Son of God. They who attempt it now will do it at their peril.

Below is a copy of the cover page of Catholic Canon Law (Corpus Iuris Canonici) and Gratian's Decretalspublished in 1879 in Germany by Emil Friedberg:

The
Donation of Constantine is quoted in column 342, part of which is shown
below. The phrase "vicarius filii dei" is found near the center of the
paragraph. (Note that a "u" is used in place of a "v".)

In
the many hundreds of years that the Donation of Constantine appeared in
Catholic Canon Law, it was apparently always presented as a genuine
historical document legally granting the papacy temporal power and
authority, for to acknowledge it as a fraud would have been to admit
that power and authority of the papacy to be likewise fraudulent. With
the forced loss of the papal states from 1798 to 1870, the territorial
sovereignty that the papacy had acquired via the donation was gone,
until 1929, when Mussolini in the Lateran Pact granted it sovereignty
over the Vatican City State.

Monseigneur Louis Gaston
A. de Sègur — 1881 — Familiar Instructions

ST. PETER'S.

What Rome is to the world,
St. Peter's is to Rome. Rome is the holy city,
the centre of the Catholic faith, the citadel of truth, the very
sanctuary of the Catholic religion. And of all the temples that are
enclosed within this one vast temple, St. Peter's is the chief; it
is the central point of religious faith in Rome, and her most
magnificent crown. Every one can understand why. Within these sacred
walls repose the relics of the Prince of the Apostles, the first
Bishop of Rome, the first of the long line of Pontiffs, the first
Vicar of Jesus Christ. And close by, in an immense palace near to
the church, the Pontiff lives, — the
successor of St. Peter, the Vicar of the Son of God, and Sovereign Pastor of all the Christians upon the face of the
whole earth.

In the Nov 15, 1914 Edition of Our Sunday Visitor,
(a
Catholic publication), the following question was addressed on page 3 in
the section titled Bureau of Information:

Is it true that the words of the Apocalypse in the 13th
Chapter, 18th verse refer to the Pope?

The words referred to are these "Here is
wisdom. He that hath understanding, let him count the number of the
beast. For it is a the number of a man: and the number of him is six
hundred sixty-six." The title of the Pope in Rome is Vicarius Filii Dei. This is inscribed on his mitre[*]; and if
you take the letters of his title which represent Latin numerals
(printed large) and add them together they come to 666.

V

I

C

A

R

I

V

S

F

I

L

I

I

D

E

I

5

1

100

1

5

1

50

1

1

500

1

Add these together and the result will be 666.
This "argument" was submitted to Rev. Ernest R. Hull, and answered in
the following manner: "Almost every eminent man in Christendom, who has
enjoyed the privilege of possessing enemies, has had his name turned and
twisted till they could get the number 666 out of it. In past history
there have been numberless beasts or Anti-Christs, all of whose names
counted up to 666. I fancy that my own name, especially in Latin form, might give the number of the beast:

E

R

N

E

S

T

V

S

R

E

G

I

N

A

L

D

V

S

H

V

L

L

5

1

50

500

5

5

50

50

=666

Quod erat demonstrandum, namely, that Rev. Ernest R. Hull is Anti-Christ, or the Beast of the Apocalypse!" Perhaps a little ingenuity with your name will show that you are the beast of the Apocalypse too.

View a facsimile scan from
microfilm.Contains
sanctions for the editor from Pope Pius X, dated May 17, 1914; from
Archbishop John Bonzano of Melitene, the Apostolic Delegate to the U.S.,
dated April 27, 1913; and from H. J. Alerding, Bishop of Fort Wayne,
Indiana., dated March 29, 1912.

*[The Vatican's Papal Sacristy has more than a dozen papal
triple (triregno) crowns, which are properly called tiaras. The papal mitre, of which there have been
very many, is quite different. A mitre is shown below on the right.]

Pope John XXIIIwearing a triple tiara.

Pope John Paul IIwearing a papal mitre.

Our Sunday Visitor, Apr. 18, 1915.

Again in the April 18th, 1915 edition of
Our Sunday Visitor,
Rev. John F. Noll, editor, the following question was addressed on page 3, in the section titled Bureau of Information:

What are the letters supposed to be in the Pope's crown, and what do they signify, if anything?

The letters inscribed in the Pope's mitre are these:
Vicarius Filii Dei,
which is the Latin for the Vicar of the Son of God. Catholics hold that
the church which is a visible society must have a visible head. Christ,
before His ascension into heaven, appointed St. Peter to act as His
representative. Upon the death of Peter the man who succeeded to the
office of Peter as Bishop of Rome, was recognized as the head of the
Church. Hence to the Bishop of Rome, as head of the Church, was given
the title "Vicar of Christ."

Enemies of the Papacy denounce this
title as a malicious assumption. But the Bible informs us that Christ
did not only give His Church authority to teach, but also to rule.
Laying claim to the authority to rule in Christ's spiritual kingdom, in
Christ's stead, is not a whit more malicious than laying claim to the
authority to teach in Christ's name. And this every Christian minister
does.

View a facsimile
scan from microfilm.Contains
sanctions for the editor from Pope Pius X, dated May 17, 1914; from
Archbishop John Bonzano of Melitene, the Apostolic Delegate to the U.S.,
dated April 27, 1913; and from H. J. Alerding, Bishop of Fort Wayne,
Indiana., dated March 29, 1912.

Our Sunday Visitor, Sept. 16, 1917.

Our Sunday Visitor had the following denial in the Bureau of Information section of the September 16, 1917 edition:

What application has the number 666 to Pope Benedict XV?—None
whatever. Such an interpretation of Chapter XIII, Verse 18 of the
Apocalypse is entirely unfounded and is nothing more than a display of
malignant hatred. It is the effervescense of vacuous minds. Earlier
commentators spent considerable time in trying to determine the
personality of the beast, and they referred it to Nero Caesar; for by
supplying the numerals for the Hebrew characters in his name, the number
666 was obtained. During the period of the Reformation and for years
after, the Apocalypse furnished the basis of much political and
religious incrimination. In later years, really reliable commentators
have ceased the silly prattle about the Popes, Napoleon, Rome and
subjecting the Book to the Rules of exegesis see a reference to
conditions existing at the time of St. John. (This interpretation, of
course, does not include the Resurrection, the millennium, and the
plagues preceding the consummation of the world, as referring to
principle events in the first century). In a "Dictionary of the Bible"
edited by William Schmidt, a Protestant author, page 1038, will be found
the following; "Ebrard reckons that not less than eighty systematic
commentaries are worthy of note, and states the less valuable writings
on this inexhaustible subject are unnumbered if not innumerable.
Fanaticism, theological hatred, and vain curiosity may have largely
influenced their composition." Also on page 1039 we find the following:
"Against the Historical scheme it is urged, that its advocates differ
very widely among themselves; that they assume without any authority
that the 1260 days are so many years; that several of its applications—e.g., of the symbol of the ten-horned beast to be the Popes, and the sixth seal to the conversion of Constantine—are
inconsistent with the context; that attempts by some of this school to
predict future events by the help of Revelation have ended in repeated
failures." Besides, if present-day writers are so
anxious to see the fulfillment in the person of the Pope, why not be
consistent? Such interpreters have never shown that the title "Vicarius
Filii Dei" is really inscribed upon the Pope's tiara. Moreover, the
passage states that the number refers to a man, in other words the
numerals represented by the letters in his name, which total the sum
666. The words Vicarius Filii Dei are not the name of the Pope, they do
not even constitute his official title. The name of our President is
Woodrow Wilson. His title is President of the United States. If we take
the name Benedict XV and follow out the same numerical addition, we find
that his number instead of being 666 would be 1123.
This question was submitted to Rev. Earnest R. Hull and answered in the
following manner: "Almost every eminent man in Christendom, who has
enjoyed the privilege of possessing enemies, has had his name turned and
twisted till they could get the number 666 out of it. In past history
there have been numberless beasts or Anti-Christs, all of whose names
counted up to 666. I fancy that my own name, especially in Latin form, might give the number of the beast:

E

R

N

E

S

T

V

S

R

E

G

I

N

A

L

D

V

S

H

V

L

L

5

1

50

500

5

5

50

50

=666

Add these together and the result will be 666.Quod erat demonstrandum, namely, that Rev. Ernest R. Hull is Anti-Christ, or the Beast of the Apocalypse!"
Since the war fanatical "private interpreters" have made the number 666
refer to the Kaiser; others even to President Wilson.

Most Rev. Bishop Noll:
I think your readers will be interested in
the following letter, which was written in the interest of truth.

Editors, "Present Truth".
Washington, D. C.:

I have just paid a visit to the Angelina County Jail here in Lufkin,
Texas, where, through the courtesy of the Judge and the Sheriff, an
opportunity was given to interview Glenn M. Warren (incarcerated on
the charge of murder) whom you have won to your anti-Catholic
belief. There he sits, poor fellow, using part of his dreary time
and artistic talents in drawing, according to your directions, a
picture of the tiara of the Pope with the words inscribed upon it
"Vicarius Filii Dei" (Vicar of the Son of God) which he has figured
out, as Seventh Day Adventism directs, to total the numerical value
666. This is intended to prove that the Pope is the beast, the
anti-Christ in the 13th. Chapter of the Book of Revelation.
Your publications have so completely captured the mind of Glenn M.
Warren (as it has others) that he, unfortunate young man, does not
sense the falsity nor the viciousness of your contention. He knows
only that were the anti-Christ to enter the Angelina County Jail he
would be more easily recognized by his work of turning minds against
the Catholic Church than by the numerical value of the name he
fears. He would not be seen, as is the representative of the pope,
the priest, going around from cell to cell directing the minds of
prisners to Christ, to the Church of Christ, and to the sacraments
Christ instituted to reconcile sinners with God. I hereby enter a protest against the distribution
of your misrepresentation among prisoners or sinners. It is an
offense against Christian charity, which does not permit the
intensification of religious animosity. You can see the evil result
of it upon the sinner who is very likely to be sent to the electric
chair. It turned his mind against Catholic Christians instead of
towards Christ and Him crucified. If
"Present Truth" is published, as you say, to tell the truth, then
would its editors and publishers refrain from filling its pages with
a mass of oft-refuted statements against the Church that owes its
origin to Jesus Christ, the Church to which Catholics have paid
honor to their Lord and their God for 1900 years. Obedience to the
law of charity calls upon you to cease embittering hearts and minds
with the monstrous notion that the pope is the 666 in the book of
Revelation. If it were a crime as well as a sin, you may be assured
that you and your associated Seventh Day Adventists would be under
lock and key for murdering truth. You are not just guilty of
misrepresenting the Catholic, but you are also guilty of abusing the
use of public places by your wanton disregard of the courtesy due to
citizens and taxpayers who are Catholics. This you have done here in
Lufkin, as elsewhere, by placing racks in the Court House, railway
station and hotels that are filled with your insulting effusions.
Before going into a detailed reply to your charge it were well to
let you know that this is not the first time that I have contacted
your evil work. I have met it in all parts of the United States
during the 70,000 mile lecture journey of the Catholic Campaigners
For Christ. Heretofore I have contented myself with the reply that
appears in my Campaigners For Christ Handbook, and by answering your
Seventh Day Adventist clientele whenever they were brazen enough to
present their offensive reference to the pope at outdoor meetings.
It is the vicious work of drawing a man indicted for murder into the
maelstrom of Seventh Day Adventist misrepresentation that promps me
to write directly to headquarters in Tacoma Park to find out whether
the time has come when a dispassionate, detailed refutation of the
charge will turn you from furthering the assault for which God will
surely punish its perpetrators if they do not repent and make
reparation for their offense. In the first
place Protestant authorities of repute today are not, as you claim,
"in practical agreement" that the beast—the anti-Christ—is the papal
authority. To quote two in one book: "Word Studies In The New
Testament", by Marvin R. Vincent, D. D. Baldwin Professor of Sacred
Literature in Union Theological Seminary, New York, 1905 (vol.
II)—says rightly: "The interpretations of the number form a jungle
from which escape is apparently hopeless. Reuss says: 'This famous
number has been made to yield almost all the historical names of the
past eighteen centuries: Titus, Vespasian, Simon Groras; Julian the
Apostate and Genseric; Mahomet and Luther; Benedict IX and Louis XV;
Napoleon I., and the Duke of Ruchstadt; and it would not he
diffcult, on the same principles, to read in any one's name'."
The correctness of this fact was demonstrated by the able Jesuit
Father Hull of Bombay who Latinized his name—(Ernestus Reginalus
Hull) to show the Seventh Day Adventists of India that according to
their system of reckoning, he himself and not the pope is the
anti-Christ in the Book of Revelation, for his name totals 666.
In the second place Protestant authorities of high standing are
agreed that the name referred to in the 13th. Chapter of the Book of
Revelation is that of a man and not the title of a man. I name the
Unabridged Edition of Cruden's Concordance (page 411) as one of many
authorities that sustain this contention. The name of the occupant
of the Chair of Peter is Pope Pius XI, and not Vicarius Filii Dei,
and it does not total 666 in any language. But more than all, there
is no such inscription on the Pope's tiara.
Vicarius Filii Dei is not the pope's title, though he is the vicar
of Jesus Christ Who is the Son of God. His title, as can be found in
Volume XV of the Catholic Encyclopedia, is (in Latin) Vicarius
Christ and that totals (V 5-i I-c 100-i I u 5-c 100-i I I) 214 and
not 666. The Catholic Encyclopedia says that at times the pope has
been called Vicar of St. Peter, Vicar of the Apostolic See. But
neither in the Catholic Encyclopedia, the Catholic Directory, nor in
papal documents, is the pope titled Vicarius Filii Dei. Besides what
warrant is there for assuming the name of the man referred to in the
Book of Revelation is to appear in Latin? St. John wrote the Book in
Greek and Vicar or Vicegerent of the Son of God in Greek does not
total numerically 666 according to your ingenious system of
reckoning. Evidently, you failed to examine, or thought your readers
too undiscerning to note, that the quotation from "Labbe and
Cossart's History" in "Present Truth" (Page 3, Vol. 3, No. 20)
rightly designates the pope as vicar of Christ, and not vicar of the
Son of God. In the fourth place if you will
not go to Catholic authorities, as every just person should, to
learn the title of the pope, then you might go to our leading
dictionaries for the information. Ah no! Seventh Day Adventists find
it more in harmony with their monstrous claim to draw upon their
imagination or to go to some anti-Catholic source for their
material. Webster's New International Dictionary says that "vicar of
(Jesus) Christ—the pope; is a title assumed with reference to his
claim to represent Christ as head of the church on earth". Please
note that Webster says "head of the church ON EARTH" for "the
papacy"' does not (as you insist in "Present Truth") "set up a man
as head of the church in place of Christ, offering him divine
worship and addressing him in terms and titles which belong only to
the Son of God". Every one of the three hundred and more millions of
Catholics in the world knows that such a thing would be a violation
of the Law of God. The pope is, as Webster says,"head of the church
on earth", for Christ Jesus is held by Catholics to be the Supreme
Head, the heavenly Head of His Universal Church which He promised to
be with until the end of the world. Webster's Dictionary says that a
vicegerent, a vicar is a representative, one "having or exercising
delegated power; acting by substitution, or in place of one
delegating hi. power." My hope is that
"Present Truth" will cease bearing false witness against Catholics
by printing real truth. My hope is that its editors and associated
preachers will call a halt to nailing Truth to the Cross as did
Pilate, the Jews, and the Roman soldiers, through the circulation of
error, slander and incentive to uncharitableness. I await your
answer to this challenge.

Rev.
Aquinas Knoff in an editorial on Vicarius Filii Dei states: “Thus, since
the Bishop of Rome is actually all the title implies, by the divine
appointment of Christ Himself, Who is the Son of God, no logical objection
can be urged against the equivalent ascription, ‘Vicar of the Son of God.’”

In an article on page 7,
"... enemies of the Church publicize something that is not true, namely
that the Pope's tiara is inscribed with the words "VICARIUS FILII DEI", and
that if letters in that title were translated into Roman numerals the sum
would equal 666. As a matter of fact the tiara of the Pope bears no
inscription whatever."

Our Sunday Visitor, in its The Catholic Answer, again explained Vicarius Filii Dei in the Question of the Day, on
Nov 24, 2011:

Question of the Day for Thursday, November 24, 2011
What Does Vicarius Filii Dei Mean?

Q. Vicarius
Filii Dei? What does this mean? Is it a phrase referring to the pope or
priest? I have heard that it is inscribed on the pope’s hat, or
something. Just curious to know what is it.

— Lloyd Howell

A. Here’s a reply from Father Reginald Martin:

Vicarius Filii Dei
means “Vicar [or representative] of the Son of God,” a term scholars
believe first appears in a document known as the “Donation of
Constantine,” dated to the eight or ninth century. This is an apt
description of the Pope, who is frequently referred to as “the Vicar of
Christ,” and, at present, probably only the most bitterly anti-Catholic
individuals would take offense at the title.

However, this has not
always been the case. Foes of Catholicism from the 16th to the 19th
centuries delighted in pointing out that the title could be turned into
the “666” that is the “mark of the beast” in the Book of Revelation.
(Those who have enjoyed Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” may smile as they
remember that Napoleon’s name and title can be similarly manipulated).

An
early reader asked Our Sunday Visitor about the title, and the
newspaper replied (April 18, 1915) that it was inscribed on the papal
tiara. A short time later, the journal printed a correction, which was
repeated in a 1922 article. Scholars have examined the existing papal
regalia (this amounts to quite a collection) and have found no evidence
that any papal crown carries the title.

Most recently, the online edition of Our Sunday Visitor had this
question and answer:

TCA
Life for January/February 2014, Father Francis Hoffman, The Catholic
Answer.12/10/2013

Papal Miter

Q. Why would the pope have
inscribed on his miter vicarius filii dei, which is not an
official title for the pope, instead of vicarius Christi, which
is an official title?

Ben Bohman, Auburndale,
Wis.

A. The pope can do
whatever he wants as long as he is faithful to Christ. The Code of Canon
Law states, “No appeal or recourse is permitted against a sentence or
decree of the Roman Pontiff” (Canon 333.3). So, the Holy Father himself
can determine what is an official title, because he is the official.

All the same, there is really no difference
between the term vicarius filii dei and vicarius Christi. The first
means “Vicar of the Son of God,” and the second is translated “Vicar of
Christ.” As the Son of God is Christ, the two mean the same thing.

The most plausible name we have ever seen suggested as containing the
number of the beast, is the blasphemous title which the pope applies to
himself, and wears in jeweled letters upon his miter or pontifical
crown. That title is this: Vicarious filii Dei: "Vicegerent of the Son
of God." Taking the letters out of this title which the Latins use as
numerals, and giving them their numerical value, we have just 666. Thus
we have V, 5; I, 1; C, 100; (a and r not used as numerals;) I, 1; U
(formerly the same as V) 5; (s and f not used as numerals;) I, 1; L, 50;
I, 1; I, 1; D, 500; (e not used as a numeral;) I, 1. Adding these
numbers together, we have just 666. The following extract on this point is from a work entitled "The Reformation,"[*] bearing the date of 1832:?
"Mrs. A., said Miss. Emmons, I saw a very curious fact the other day; I
have dwelt upon it much and will mention it. A person, lately, was
witnessing a ceremony of the Romish church. As [pg. 226] the Pope passed
him in the procession, splendidly dressed in his pontifical robes, the
gentleman's eye rested on these full, blazing, letters in front of his
miter: "VICARIOUS FILII DEI," The Vicar of the Son of God." His
thoughts, with the rapidity of lightning, reverted to Rev. xiii, 18.
Will you turn to it? said Mrs. A. Alice opened the New Testament and
read: 'Let him that hath understanding count the number of the
beast; for it is the number of a man; and his number is six hundred
three score and six.'She paused, and Miss. Emmons said, He took
out his pencil, and, marking the numerical letters of the inscription on
his tablet, it stood 666." Here we have indeed
the number of a man, even the "man of sin;" and it is a little singular,
perhaps providential, that he should select a title which shows the
blasphemous character of the beast, and then cause it to be inscribed
upon his miter, as if to brand himself with the number 666.

[*]
The Reformation: A True Tale of the Sixteenth Century,
by Anne Tuttle Jones Bullard, published in 1832 by the Massachusetts Sabbath School Society, Boston, Massachusetts, pgs.
247-248. Identification by Jerry A. Stevens, October 9, 2006.

Source: Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Revelation,
by Uriah Smith, published in 1865 by the Steam Press of the Seventh-day
Adventist Publishing Association, Battle Creek, Michigan, pgs.
225-226.

Note
that Anne Bullard, on page 247, presents the title with the word
VICARIVS, the old Latin spelling that uses a "V" for a "U". This is
likely to be the form of the word used if it appeared on a papal tiara
or mitre. Uriah Smith on the other hand, misquotes Bullard, using the
unlikely English spelling, VICARIOUS, which has "OU". Smith in his later
publications changes this to the more modern Latin, VICARIUS, using
only a "U", as shown below, which also may be the way it was inscribed
with jewels on the papal mitre or tiara.

.
. . The most plausible expression we have seen suggested as containing
the number of the beast, is the title which the pope takes to himself,
and allows others to apply to him. That title is this: Vicarius Filii Dei,
"Vicegerent of the Son of God." Taking the letters out of this title
which the Latins used as numerals, and giving them their numerical
value, we have just 666. Thus we have V, 5; I, 1; C, 100; (a and r not used as numerals); I, 1; U (formerly the same as V), 5; (s and
f not used as numerals); I, 1; L, 50; I, 1; I, 1; D, 500 (e not used as a numeral); I, 1. Adding these numbers together, we have just 666.
This title, there is reason to believe, was formerly inscribed upon the
pope's crown. The following testimony on this point is given by the
late Elder D. E. Scoles, of Washburn, Mo.:— "I
have met two men who declare that they have seen this specific crown;
and their testimony is so perfectly in agreement that I am convinced
that what they saw is true. The first man was M. De Latti, a
Sabbath-keeper who had previously been a Catholic priest, and had spent
four years in Rome. He visited me when I was pastor in St. Paul, Minn.,
several years ago. I showed him my tract,
'The Seal of God and the Mark of the Beast.'
He at once told me that the inscription was not correctly placed in my
illustration. He stated that he had often seen it in the museum at the
Vatican, and [pg. 625] gave a detailed and accurate description of the
whole crown.
When
my tract was published [Feb. of 1895], I was ignorant of the
arrangement of the words of the Latin inscriptions, hence, in the
illustration of the crown, placed them in one line. Brother De Latti at
once pointed out the mistake, and said the first word of the sentence
was on the first crown of the triple arrangement, the second word on the
second part of the crown, while the word Dei was on the lower
division of the triple crown. He also explained that the first two words
were in dark-colored jewels, while the Dei was composed entirely of diamonds.
"During a tent-meeting which I held in Webb City, Mo., I presented the
subject, 'The Seal of God and the Mark of the Beast.' I used charts to
illustrate it, one being a reproduction of the crown as Brother De Latti
had described it. A Presbyterian minister was present, Rev. B. Hoffman,
and when I described the crown, he spoke out publicly and made a
statement to the congregation, saying that while in Rome studying for
the priesthood, he had seen this very crown, and noted its inscription,
and that the word Dei was composed of one hundred diamonds. I met
him and learned his name, and visited him at his home, and was
convinced from his description that this was the identical crown that
Brother De Latti had seen, but which has been denied by many. I then
asked him for a written statement, and he gave me the following:— " ' To Whom It May Concern:
This is to certify that I was born in Bavaria in 1828, was educated in
Munich, and was reared a Roman Catholic. In 1844 and 1845 I was a
student for the priesthood in the Jesuit College in Rome. During the
Easter service of 1845, Pope Gregory XVI wore a triple crown upon which
was the inscription, in jewels, Vicarius Filii Dei. We were told that there were one hundred diamonds in the word
Dei;
the other words were of some other kind of precious stones of a darker
color. There was one word upon each crown, and not all on the same line.
I was present at the service, and saw the crown distinctly, and noted
it carefully. " ' In 1850 I was converted to God
and to Protestantism. Two years later I entered the Evangelical Church
ministry, but later in life I united with the Presbyterian Church, of
[pg. 626] which I am now a retired pastor, having been in the ministry
for fifty years. " ' I have made the above
statement at the request of Elder D. E. Scoles, as he states that some
deny that the pope ever wore this tiara. But I know that he did, for I
saw it upon his head.

The following extract is from a work entitled The Reformation,[*] bearing the date of 1832:—
" ' Mrs. A.,' said Miss Emmons, ' I saw a very curious fact the other
day; I have dwelt upon it much, and will mention it. A person, lately,
was witnessing a ceremony of the Romish Church. As the pope passed him
in procession, splendidly dressed in his pontifical robes, the
gentleman's eye rested on these full, blazing letters in front of his
miter: "VICARIUS FILII DEI," the Vicar of the Son of God. His thoughts,
with the rapidity of lightning, reverted to Rev. 13:18.' 'Will you turn
to it?' said Mrs. A. Alice opened the New Testament and read: 'Let him
that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the
number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.' She
paused, and Miss Emmons said, 'He took out his pencil, and marking the
numerical letters of the inscription on his tablet, it stood 666.' " Here we have indeed the number of a man, even the
"man of sin;"
and it is a little singular, perhaps providential, that he should
select a title which shows the blasphemous character of the beast, and
then cause it to be inscribed upon his miter, as if to brand himself
with the number 666.

[*]
The Reformation: A True Tale of the Sixteenth Century,
by Anne Tuttle Jones Bullard, published in 1832 by the Massachusetts Sabbath School Society, Boston, Massachusetts, pgs.
247-248. Identification by Jerry A. Stevens, October 9, 2006.

Source: Daniel and the Revelation.
The Response of History to the Voice of Prophecy: A Verse by Verse Study of These Important Books of the Bible,
by Uriah Smith, Southern Publishing Association, Nashville, Tennessee,
copyright 1907 by Mrs. Uriah Smith, (published sometime after May of
1911), pgs. 624-626.

Elder D. E. Scoles' account was also published in the
Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Dec, 20, 1906,
page 10.

Easter Mass 1843

A Rev. Joel Tyler Headley, in the
April 1845 edition of the
Christian Parlor magazine,
wrote that he had visited Rome and witnessed the spectacle of the
Easter service in St. Peter's, and mentioned that the Pope wore a triple
tiara to and from the service, though he did not take note of any
inscription. He also published his account in his Letters From Italy, published in
1845 & 1847 in New York, Wiley and Putnam, 161 Broadway, (Revised, 1848, New York, Baker & Scribner), pages
115-121, in which he dates his visit to St. Peter's as Easter of 1843.

I
have received what seems to be reliable information that a photo may
exist (similar to the one below) of a papal funeral in St. Peter's
Basilica near the beginning of the 20th century, in which the tiara
inscribed with Vicarius Filii Dei can be seen. Combined with the above
claims of Our Sunday Visitor, this would indicate that it was the
funeral of either Leo XIII (1878-1903), or Pius X (1903-1914), and that
previous popes probably wore the tiara in question. If anyone can turn
up any photos and make them available to me, I will post them in this
article.

LEO XIII

The Trenton Times of New
Jersey reported on July 23rd, 1903, that during the first of nine days
of mourning for Pope Leo XIII, his coffin was publicly displayed on a
catafalque in the choir chapel opposite the Chapel of the Sacrament,
surmounted by a triple tiara.

The Reno Evening Gazette
reported on July 28th, 1903, that for a requiem Mass for Leo XIII, a
large catafalque was placed in the Sistine chapel, and on top of it was
displayed a triple tiara on two cushions.

Catafalque in the Sistine chapel for the requiem Masses for Pope Leo XIII.A triple tiara can be seen at the top.

PIUS X

The Syracuse Herald
of New York reported on August 21, 1914 that the body of Pope Pius X
lay in state wearing pontifical vestments, to include a triple crown.

The
body of Pope Pius X (who died in 1914) on display in front of St.
Peter's high altar during a Pontifical Mass on May 30th, 1954,
celebrating his canonization as a Saint the prior evening. A papal
tiara can be seen above the glass-sided casket.

That
the papal tiara was routinely worn both before and after a pontifical
Mass at the Vatican, is demonstrated by the following 1911 Catholic
Encyclopedia entry:

Pontifical Mass

The
solemn pontifical Mass celebrated by the pope in St. Peter's has some
peculiar ceremonies. ... The pope, wearing the falda, amice, alb,
cincture, pectoral cross, stola, cope (mantum), and tiara is carried
into the basilica on the sedia gestatoria under the canopy and with the two
flabella
borne on either side. ... The pope returns to the altar to finish the
Mass. After the blessing the assistant priest publishes the plenary
indulgence. At the end of the last Gospel the pope goes to the sedia gestatoria, puts on the tiara, and returns in procession as he had entered.

Pope John XXIII celebrating Mass at St. Peter's. Two triple tiaras can be seen on the altar to the Pope's right and a mitre to his left.

Note
the following item in a widely circulated Catholic publication from
1938. In it the title Vicarius Filii Dei and 666 is discussed, but the
validity of Vicarius Filii Dei as a papal title is not denied:

345.
I have heard that he [the pope] is Anti-Christ, and that he was
described by St. John as 666, the numerical equivalent of the Latin
words of the Pope's title, Vicarius Filii Dei.

That
interpretation is absurd, and rejected by all reputable scholars,
Catholic and non-Catholic alike. In any case, St. John wrote in Greek,
and there is no warrant whatever for the translation to the Latin
language. Moreover, whatever be the true interpretation of this mystical
number, it certainly refers to some one individual being. If it
referred to one particular Pope, it could refer to none of the others.
To which Pope will people refer it? To a past Pope? Then he is dead and
gone, and we need not worry about him. To the present Pope? He is the
very antithesis of all the conditions of the Beast as described by St.
John. However, the number does not refer to any of the Popes at all.

Some
Catholics will respond to the Seventh-day Adventist that the number 666
can similarly be derived from the name of Ellen Gould White, a
prominent figure in the Adventist church (see the article at
New Advent). The calculation is made as follows:

E

L

L

E

N

G

O

U

L

D

W

H

I

T

E

50

50

5

50

500

10

1

The
letter "w" is asserted to be the equivalent of a double "v" or "u",
which has a value of 5 and is therefore 10 when doubled.. However, in
Latin and Roman numerals there was no "w" with a value of 10. A single
"v" was used to represent the "w", "v" and "u" sound, The double-u (w)
apparently evolved many centuries later in other languages, but not
Roman numerals. The valid Roman numerals are:

Letter

Value

I

1

V

5

X

10

L

50

C

100

D

500

M

1,000

So, ELLEN GOVLD WHITE does not, in fact,
add up to 666. Be that as it may, for the moment, lets accept the
application to Ellen White. Does this indicate that she is a likely
candidate for the Antichrist or beast described in Revelation 13? Even
the Catholics that raised this issue do not seriously consider Ellen
White to be the Antichrist that scripture warns about. She will simply
not fit the many other characteristics attributed to the Antichrist.
Using this random method of application to individuals, it is apparent
that there might be literally thousands of names that add up to 666, particularly if they are manipulated and Latinized as Rev. Ernest R. Hull demonstrated in the
Our Sunday Visitor
article above. Clearly this approach is sheer foolishness, and proves
nothing, but this deliberate attempt at obscurantism by Catholics in no
way invalidates Roman numeral gematria as the solution to 666.

Logically, all the other characteristics of "the Antichrist" must be considered and successfully met
first.
Only then should solving the mystery of 666 be attempted, after all the
other biblical criteria have been solved satisfactorily, eliminating
all who do not qualify. Then applying 666 will surely result in a
unique, unambiguous, and extraordinarily powerful validation that will
prove impossible to duplicate with any other entity. See the series of
articles beginning at The 3 Angel's Messages and also
The Contextual Biblical Exegesis Of 666 In Revelation 13:18 for this methodology in practice.

Vicarius
Filii Dei was used twice by Pope Paul VI in documents found on the
Vatican's web site. These are Apostolic Constitutions, which are the
highest form of official Papal decree in the Roman Catholic Church and
are issued with binding legal authority. Historically these decrees were
known as papal bulls, the name referring to the lead metal seal (bulla)
attached to authenticate the document. As a general rule, the
superscription that opens papal bulls typically reads:

Adorandi Dei Filii Vicarius et Procurator, quibus numen aeternum summam Ecclesiae sanctae dedit, ...As
the worshipful Son of God's Vicar and Caretaker, to whom the eternal
divine will has given the highest rank of the holy Church, ...

Acta Apostolicae Sedis (Acts of the Apostolic See)
is the official publication of the Holy See, and documents published in
it are considered authentic and officially promulgated. The Vatican's
web site for their Secret Archives estimates the total number of papal
documents to be
above
30 million.
This is a staggering number of documents, and makes it a virtual
certainty that Vicarius Filii Dei was used in other official documents
that have yet to be discovered.

So, since the Donation of Constantine, which was held by the Roman
Catholic Church for over 600 years to be a valid document transferring
authority from Emperor Constantine, Vicarius Filii Dei continued to appear
in Catholic publications, and official papal decrees, well into the 20th
century. This is irrefutable proof that it is not a Protestant
invention.

English translations of the above Apostolic Constitutions are not
available on the Vatican web site. However, regarding the translation of
Rivi Muniensis, a similar wording in Latin was used by Cardinal
Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621) that can act as a guide. Here is one
example in his De Ecclesia militante:

As thus
understood, the definition of the Church given by Bellarmine is that
usually adopted by Catholic theologians: "A body of men united together
by the profession of the same Christian Faith, and by participation in
the same sacraments, under the governance of lawful pastors, more
especially of the Roman Pontiff, the sole vicar of Christ on earth"
(Cœtus hominum ejusdem christianse fidei professione, et eorumdem
sacramentorum communione colligatus, sub regimine legitimorum pastorum
et praecipue unius Christi in Terris vicarii Romani
Pontificis.—Bellarmine, De Eccl., III, ii, 9).

Source: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume Three, copyright 1908 by Robert Appleton Co., and 1913 by The Encyclopedia Press, entry on The Church,
page 745.

Note
that in the above translation of the Latin: "unius Christi in Terris
vicarii Romani Pontificis", "vicarii" does not apply to "Romani
Pontificis" (i.e., vicar of the Roman Pontiff), but rather it applies to
the preceding "Christi" (vicar of Christ on earth). This indicates that
in the similarly worded Rivi Muniensis, "Vicarii" applies to
"Filii Dei" (Son of God's vicar upon the earth), not "Petrique
Successores" (vicar of Peter's successor, or vicar and successor of
Peter) as an English speaker might presume. It is also worth noting that
Cardinal Bellarmine's definition of the Christian Church excludes those
who do not consider themselves subject to the authority of the Roman
Pontiff, which is to say that Protestants are not part of the Church.

[pg. 3] The leader of the Catholic Church is defined by the faith as the
Vicar of Jesus Christ (and is accepted as such by believers). The Pope is considered the man on earth who
represents the Son of God, who "takes the place" of the Second Person of the omnipotent God of the Trinity.

[pg. 6] Have no fear when people call me the "Vicar of Christ,"
when they say to me "Holy Father," or "Your Holiness," or use titles
similar to these, which seem even inimical [hostile] to the Gospel.
Christ himself declared: "Call no one on earth your father; you have but
one Father in heaven. Do not be called 'Master'; you have but one
master, the Messiah" (Mt 23:9-10). These expressions, nevertheless, have
evolved out of a long tradition, becoming part of common usage. One
must not be afraid of these words either.

[pg. 13] The Pope is not the only one who holds this title. With regard to the Church entrusted to him, each bishop is
Vicarius Christi.

Note
that on page three of the Pope's book, "represents the Son of God" is
synonymous with "Vicar of Jesus Christ". A vicar clearly represents,
substitutes for, or "takes the place" of another, as stated.
Consequently "represents the Son of God" can be translated in Latin as Vicarius Filii Dei, which in Roman Numerals will add up to 666. The title
Vicarius Christi,
translated into English, means a substitute for Christ, i.e.,
Antichrist, as demonstrated above, which is applied by the Pope to every
bishop of the Catholic Church!

18. Here is wisdom.
Compare the phrase, “here is the mind which hath wisdom” (ch. 17:9).
The wisdom here commended is doubtless that to which Paul refers in Eph.
1:17. Only by divine enlightenment will men understand the mysteries of
the Word of God (see on 1 Cor. 2:14).Understanding. Or, “intelligence.” Those who wish to know the meaning of the cryptic number may understand.
Count. Or, “calculate.” Number of the beast.
It should be noted that the beast has already been conclusively
identified (see on vs. 1–10). The number provides confirmatory evidence
of this. Since the early days of
Christianity there has been much discussion as to the significance of
666. One of the earliest to write on the subject was Irenaeus (c. a.d.
130–c. 202). He identified the beast as the Antichrist, and believed
that the numerical values of the letters of his name would add up to
666. He suggested the name Teitan, a name sometimes accounted divine, as having great probability. He also suggested, but as much less probable, the name
Lateinos,
this being the name of the last kingdom of the four seen by Daniel. At
the same time he warned that “it is therefore more certain, and less
hazardous, to await the fulfillment of the prophecy, than to be making
surmises, and casting about for any names that may present themselves,
inasmuch as many names can be found possessing the number mentioned” (Against Heresies v. 30. 3;
ANF,
vol. 1, p. 559). Since Irenaeus’ day 666 has been applied to many
names. The number alone cannot identify the beast since numerous names
can add up to 666. However, inasmuch as the beast has already been
identified, the number 666 must have a relationship to this power.
Otherwise there would be no valid reason for the angel giving John the
information contained in v. 18, at this point in the prophetic
narrative. An interpretation that gained currency in the period
following the Reformation was that 666 stood for Vicarius Filii Dei,
meaning “vicar of the Son of God,” one of the titles for the pope of
Rome. The numerical value of the component letters of this title totals
666 as follows:

V

5

I

1

C

100

A

.....

R

.....

I

1

V

(U=V)

5

S

.....

F

.....

I

1

L

50

I

1

I

1

D

500

E

.....

I

1

___

666

This
interpretation was based on the identification of the pope as
Antichrist, the historic Reformation concept. The principal exponent of
this interpretation was Andreas Helwig (c. 1572–1643; see L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers,
vol. 2, pp. 605–608). Many since his day have adopted this
interpretation. Inasmuch as this commentary identifies the beast as the
papacy, it also accepts this view as being the beast thus far presented,
though recognizing that there may be more implied in the cryptogram
than this interpretation provides. Regarding the title Vicarius Filii Dei, the Catholic journal
Our Sunday Visitor,
of April 18, 1915, reported in answer to a query, “What are the letters
supposed to be in the Pope’s crown, and what do they signify, if
anything?” “The letters inscribed in the Pope’s mitre are these: Vicarius Filii Dei,
which is the Latin for Vicar of the Son of God. Catholics hold that the
Church which is a visible society must have a visible head” (p. 3). The
issue of November 15, 1914, admitted that the Latin numerals added
together total 666, but went on to declare that many other names also
yield this total. In the issue of August 3, 1941, page 7, the subject of
Vicarius Filii Dei again came up for discussion, and the
statement was made that this title is not inscribed on the pope’s tiara.
The tiara, it averred, bears no inscription whatsoever (p. 7). The Catholic Encyclopedia
distinguishes between the mitre and the tiara by describing the tiara
as a non-liturgical ornament and the mitre as one worn for liturgical
functions. Whether the inscription Vicarius Filii Dei appears on
the tiara or the mitre is really beside the point. The title is
admittedly applied to the pope, and that is sufficient for the purposes
of prophecy.

"If the person making this claim disputes these facts, ask him to furnish an example of the alleged title,
Vicarius Filii Dei,
being used officially by a pope. You won't encounter papal decrees,
conciliar statements, or other authentic, official Catholic documents in
which the pope calls himself the 'Vicar of the Son of God.' Why?
Because no such examples exist. Vicarius Filii Dei has never been an official title of the pope." (Pope Fiction, by Patrick Madrid, 1999, pg. 91.)

"Vicarius Filii Dei never has been used as a title by any Pope." (Catholicism and Fundamentalism,
by Karl Keating, 1988, pg 221.)

Pope
Paul VI used the title twice, in 1965 and 1968, in Apostolic
Constitutions, applying the title to himself, and in plural form to all
Peter's successors. See http://biblelight.net/666.htm#OFFICIALI invite the two of you to respond to this papal use of the title, and I will also append your response to my web page.

Michael Scheifler

On Sept. 10th, 2009, former Seventh Day Adventist now Roman Catholic, Hugo Mendez, posted a response to this article on his
blog.Here is my reply.

In
the above rebuttal by Stephen Haws, it is conceded that Vicarius Filii
Dei applies to Peter, but he tries to make the case that it does not
apply to Peter's successors. Was Peter the first Pope, according to
Catholics? Yes, of course he was. Then Stephen Haws has in effect
conceded that Vicarius Filii Dei is a genuine papal title.